Template:Did you know nominations/Geotechnical applications of Lidar
Appearance
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Yoninah (talk) 13:11, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
DYK toolbox |
---|
Geotechnical applications of LiDAR
- ... that LiDAR can be used to make a digital terrain model? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
- ALT1:... that ...? Source: [1]
- Reviewed: Extremely Online
- Comment: part of Regional Geology course
Moved to mainspace by Waikinl (talk). Nominated by Graeme Bartlett (talk) at 03:41, 23 November 2020 (UTC).
- While there are two sections about digital terrain models, the hook isn't actually in the article. There are parts at the end of sections that are unreferenced, as well as parts of the two wikitables. The article also shouldn't be an orphan. Otherwise - I can verify some of the information by reading the source abstracts and I assume good faith on the rest of the sourced information. A QPQ has been completed. The image is free use. SL93 (talk) 23:35, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
- The article creator came back and fixed the issues and while a few of the sentences at the end of sections are unferenced, those sentences basically just summarize what was stated in an easier to grasp way. I completed a few minor edits and I took care of the orphan tag. The reliably cited newly added sentence by the article creator - "After collecting LiDAR data from pre-earthquake and post-earthquake landforms, by constructing 3-D digital terrain models, the displacement and deformations can be derived." now makes it so that the hook is acceptable. This is ready. SL93 (talk) 13:24, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
- The article title was also changed. SL93 (talk) 13:30, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
- Yoninah I see that the hook source, which is also used for the next sentence, is improperly used. I know that I can likely source it, but I'm thinking I would need to call for a new reviewer if I do so. SL93 (talk) 19:55, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
- @SL93: well, if you're the only one who's going to source this so it will pass, please do so and I'll get another reviewer. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 20:29, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
- I sourced the two sentences which includes the hook. I'm calling for a new reviewer. SL93 (talk) 20:14, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
- Yoninah It looks like we got into a strange edit conflict. SL93 (talk) 20:31, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
-
- Nomination was a day late, but appears to be a student nom? Hook fact sourced in article, there's a whole section about it, actually. Prose could be tightened up, but looks fine for MP. I'd probably ask if the whole article couldn't be merged into Lidar. The bold link in the hook also needs to be moved (to "can be used" or there about). The hook seems fairly simple but I'll go out on a limb and assume most people don't know what LiDAR is, so this is a benefit. Kingsif (talk) 10:39, 28 December 2020 (UTC)